Allowed

Rajbahadur v. State of Raj and Anr.

Rajasthan HC19 Nov 2020CRLMP/2675/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a penal petition seeking release of a confiscated truck. The court permitted release to the registered owner upon payment of security and undertaking, citing precedents on rusted vehicles, while noting exceptions for statutory confiscation.

What did the court decide?

The offending truck (RJ-11-GA-0517) was directed to be released to the registered owner upon payment of Rs.5,00,000/- security and furnishing photographs and an undertaking.

Rajbahadur Vs State of Raj and Anr. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2675/2018

¶3

Rajbahadur S/o Shri Chidaram, B/c Gurjar, R/o Tajpur, Tehsil Basedi, District Dholpur Raj.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Rajasthan Through P.p.

¶7

Appellant Authority Cum C.c.f. Bharatpur Raj.

¶8

----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rati Ram Besla For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Bhadu, PP

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶11

Order

¶12

19/11/2020

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vehicle, which is involved in the incident, deserve to be released as it would get rusted and spoiled, if it is remained in the police custody.

¶14

I have considered the submissions as above.

¶15

In the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Versus State of Gujarat : (2002) 10 SCC 283 , the Apex Court has made observations with regard to the conditions, which should be laid down for release of different goods/vehicles. It has also been observed that no purpose would be served in letting vehicle remained in the police custody as he get rusted and therefore, the conditions may be laid down for releasing of the same. This Court has also taken a similar view in a batch of Criminal Misc. Petitions lead case being S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 679/2020 :

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[CRLMP-2675/2018]

¶18

Kurshid Versus State of Rajasthan , along with other connected petitions.-

¶19

Keeping in view the above, this petition is allowed with the following terms:

¶20

a) The concerned Police Station shall release the offending vehicles – Truck bearing Registration No.RJ-11-GA-0517 to the person, who is the registered owner of the said vehicles. b) A personal security of an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned Court to which the concerned Police Station is attached, shall be submitted by the petitioner for the purpose of release of the vehicles.

¶21

c) The petitioner shall furnish the photographs of the vehicles showing their numbers and colour etc.

¶22

d). At the time of release, the petitioner shall also give an undertaking to the effect that vehicle shall not be used for any illegal purpose and if so found, the concerned owner shall be personally liable.

¶23

The order passed by the Court below is accordingly quashed and set aside.

¶24

However, it is made clear that if vehicle(s) has been confiscated under the relevant provisions of the Act, then said vehicle(s) shall not be released by the concerned Magistrate. Keeping in view of law laid down in the case of Laxman Versus State of Rajasthan : DB Criminal Misc. Petition No. 60/2018 decided on 6.4.2018.

¶25

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶26

NITIN /374

Rajbahadur v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajbahadur v. State of Raj and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aas Mohammed Son of Late Shri Chander Khan Vs the State of Rajasthan

Santosh Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Jitendra Kumar S/O Shri Dinesh Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan

Motilal S/O Radha Kishan Vs State of Rajasthan

Poonam D/O Shri Hawa Singh W/O Shri Hemraj Gurjar Vs the State of Rajasthan

Rajana Varma W/O Rahul Khatnawaliya D/O Radhe Shyam Raigar Vs Satate of Rajasthan